Immigrationboards.com

Hello All,

I was going through this forum from long time and is really helpful with timely suggestions. I am in total confusion now. Could some one help me.

I had all my previous extensions ( Student, PSW & Tier 1 General) on time except one situation. So requested for SAR to make sure if i had applied on time. I received it today was in total shock as to what happened at that time. In that situation had my visa till 31/12/2005 and records on SAR show they have received my application on 04/01/2006 and was returned on 16/01/2006 stating that cheque has been returned by the bank. So again application was posted back to HO on 18/01/2006 but was again returned stating that the application was invalid on 13/03/2006. So an application was again sent on 18/03/2006 and visa was issued on 04/04/2006.

So could please some one tell if this is considered as a break and will this be a hindrance to my 10yr application. please suggest me, i need your help.

Thanks in advance

What were you applying for at that time?

I got similar problems and also waiting for help.

According to the info I searched, the “Raise date” is the date counted by the HO, when I got my SAR back, a lot of docs involved and there are normally several dates I can find regarding same application. It was quite confusing.

Besides, if you submit you application through post and you have the evidence, the post date will be taken account even if it was earlier than the HO “Raise date”.

Good luck for both of us

I really dont know what the answer to your queries but I have one question, were the one who made all those applications or was someone else trying to make applications in your name? I ask this because you say you were shocked to see the many applications that you made! If someone was trying to make application in your name then you need to report that to UKBA and the police because it is illegal.

I was extending my student visa at that time. spoke one imm. lawyer what he say is coz the application was sent back this will be considered as a break. i am not sure what to do now.

The application was not made my some one else, it was me but couldnt remember all this happened.

See also URGENT ADVICE NEEDED ON 10 YEAR ILR.

Thanks Vinny for your response. so how about the second postal application in march 2006 which was again sent back as invalid application. I dont have any proof ( letter from the HO ) as to why the application was sent as invalid. I could only get this information looking at SAR.

Is it worth giving a try or will be waste of money?

I sincerely need your advice.

Thanks

Worth trying.

Thanks a lot for the information and confidence Vinny. But not sure how to defend my case in covering letter. In the SAR report received there was no letters from HO saying that need to send my application back in 28 days. Can i take that it is implied or should i have any of the letters as evidence. Please could you give information on this.

Thanks

Quote the relevant regulations given in the above links, to show that there were no gaps.

Hello,

Could some one help me drafting a strong letter to the HO. Thanks for all the responses and special thanks to Vinny for providing supporting information.

Vinny when my application was sent back second time it was not due to payment but was due to invalid application. But i am not sure what was the reason for an invalid application. Will this fall under the same section or do i need to provide any special sections to argue on this.

Thanks a lot for helping me.

Thanks

I think that:

The first (non-payment) fell under The Immigration and Nationality (Cost Recovery Fees) Regulations 2007 > section 16.
The second (other reasons) fell under The Immigration (Leave to Remain) (Prescribed Forms and Procedures) Regulations 2005 > section 14.

Thanks for your response Vinny. Now i feel i could go ahead and apply. when i checked my SAR file there was no letter from HO with my returned application that application can be sent back in 28 days. Is that implied or do we need to have any letter from them.

Thanks in advance.

Implied by the quoted regulations.